Qantas is the largest airline using Brisbane Airport that is yet to reach an agreement with Brisbane Airport Corporation.

Mr Grant said there would be - ultimately - a pact made between Qantas and BAC.

"There will be an agreement with Qantas and BAC," Mr Grant said.

Brisbane airport main runway Photo: Scott Beveridge

Asked why there was a delay?

"They are good negotiators," he said.

Mr Grant shrugged off suggestions an agreement with Qantas was necessary before the third phase of the parallel runway project - the laying of the runway tarmac - could proceed.

Building a new Brisbane Airport runway: the sand route. Photo: Tony Moore

"We will complete the project by 2020," he said.

Mr Grant said the company was ‘‘absolutely committed’’ to building the parallel runway despite a long-running stoush with airlines over funding arrangements.

“This is a clear signal that we are absolutely committed to building this critical piece of national infrastructure,” he said.

It will be long process - the new runway site now must be loaded with 13 million cubic metres of sand over a period of four years to stabilise its marshy foundations.

Once the ground is consolidated in 2016-17, the construction of the 3.3 kilometre runway and taxiway pavements can begin.

Upon completion, Brisbane Airport will have a runway system with the capacity of major international airports including Hong Kong and Singapore.

The number of "aircraft movements'' will increase from 40 to 100 an hour when the new runway is complete in 2020, according to the corporation.

BAC started land-clearing and drainage works in preparation for the parallel runway in August last year, but the airport and airlines locked horns over how to fund construction.

The airport came under increasing pressure in the meantime to reduce congestion, with planes regularly forced into holding patterns, circling the city while waiting to land.

It is understood BAC has since decided to foot much of the bill and press ahead with the next crucial stage of construction to ensure the runway is operating by 2020.

BAC had threatened to invoice airlines for the construction via increases to landing fees over eight years, with chief executive Julieanne Alroe saying the runway was ‘‘absolutely essential for Brisbane’’.

Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce was most vocal in his opposition, saying the airline was not interested in contributing up to $500 million, as requested by BAC, without reaping an immediate benefit for its customers.

Virgin Australia broke ranks in June, striking a confidential funding deal with BAC in exchange for major improvements to its own terminal.

- with Tony Moore

45 comments

What happened to the proposal to extend the cross runway and get traffic over the bay?

And how does what is essentially a 3.3 km road cost 1300 million dollars?

Commenter

T.

Date and time

October 10, 2013, 8:22AM

A jet airliner is a lot heavier than a car and doesn't have any traction in its wheels. Thus there needs to be better drainage especially given the heavy rain you get in Brisbane. Also bear in mind cars don't typically "land" on roads putting pressure on them.

Commenter

Paul

Date and time

October 10, 2013, 8:53AM

A few reasons why this "road" is so expensive... for starters it is not just a bit of bitumen spread onto the ground like Vegemite on toast. It has to support the weight of airliners weighing several hundred tonnes taking off and landing on it. That means a thick surface and very strong foundations. If you haven't noticed the area where they are going to build the runway is basically a swamp, so expensive preparation work is required to get the subsoil strong enough to support the runway. Equally strong works are required to build new taxiways, and of course there is a bunch of radio ILS equipment to be installed which you can't exactly buy from Bunnings.

The cross runway will be closed after the new one is built. No point spending money extending it because it's impractical to use both runways at the same time, even if the winds allow it. The reason being that since the runways are crossing each other, flight paths clash (e.g. aircraft can't take off towards the bay on the main runway at the same time that an aircraft approaches the cross runway southbound in case they abort the landing - you must have contingency to accommodate that as an air traffic controller). The net result is you can't utilise both runways fully effectively anyway.

Good result from BAC, let's get the shovels turning ASAP.

Commenter

Ciaran

Location

Brisbane

Date and time

October 10, 2013, 9:10AM

A new runway is not "essentially a 3.3km road". How many normal roads are 60m wide? A 60m wide road would be a 17 lane highway. For the point of comparison lets assume that the standard two lane road is 8m wide; using a 8m wide road it would need to be 25km long to have the same surface area as the new runway.

Even then comparing a runway to a road is silly, because they are two very different things. Roads have pavements that are designed to suit the load of heavy vehicles (trucks), runways have pavements designed to suit the load of heavy aircraft such as the 747 and the A380. The A380 has a mass of 590 tonnes. Your standard tri-axle semi trailer can have a maximum mass of 22.5 tonnes. Meaning the pavement for the runway needs to cater for loads that are about 26 times heavier than your standard semi trailer.

So without even considering the crappy existing ground conditions, which at Brisbane Airport is a major cost factor, a 3.3km long road, and 3.3km runway are very different things, and hence the difference in cost. Just the cost of pre-loading the ground with 13 million cubic metres of sand would probably cost at least $200 million.

Commenter

Les

Date and time

October 10, 2013, 11:56AM

Why is the new 3300m runway to cost $1.3 billion, whereas the planned 3000m runway for Melbourne Tullamarine is estimated at $500m? Those extra 300 metres are costing a lot.

Commenter

wonderous

Date and time

October 10, 2013, 8:36AM

I'm not at all sure about this, but maybe the foundations are where the extra cash is going? Isn't the whole of Brisbane Airport on a swamp?

Commenter

Curious

Date and time

October 10, 2013, 9:16AM

A lot of the Brisbane runway has to be reclaimed land from the sea, so they have to truck in a lot of dirt, pack it down, drain it, let it sit, pack it down some more etc.

Commenter

Mob

Location

Brisbane

Date and time

October 10, 2013, 9:23AM

It's all in the ground work. Brisbane airport is built on a swamp so ground stabilisation is the problem.A better solution would be to build a commercial airport terminal at Amberley, if the Hercules transport plane can land there, anything can.

Commenter

Scotty_16

Date and time

October 10, 2013, 9:45AM

The massive difference in cost is because the new runway is to be built on reclaimed land through an area full of mangroves and swamps. Something that Melbourne doesn't have to deal with.